IggyPride00 wrote: Obamacare will be the official transition into a single payer system. An interview surfaced recently with him stating the need for a transition program of sorts because it couldn't just happen over night because of the complexity of changing the system.

Fundamental transformation of America begins now.

When will the death panel sign up sheets be administered?

Obama won't be around for that. No way he gets re-elected in 2012.

tk421 wrote:

gibby08 wrote: I'm not talking about that..

I'm talking about how when the CBO agrees with you people...you love them

When they don't...they suck and are unreliable

Where does all your blind faith in the government come from? Is it just because it's a Democratic bill? Why do you believe the government? When have they ever passed a bill that cost the same or less than they said?

No...I don't support this bill simply because the Dems are putting it out there. Had this been John McCain and a Republican congress...I would have supported this bill just the same,because it's something I believe in...just like I support the idea of not legalizing gay marriage

Iggy...cut out that death panel shit

tk421 wrote:

IggyPride00 wrote: Obamacare will be the official transition into a single payer system. An interview surfaced recently with him stating the need for a transition program of sorts because it couldn't just happen over night because of the complexity of changing the system.

Fundamental transformation of America begins now.

When will the death panel sign up sheets be administered?

Obama won't be around for that. No way he gets re-elected in 2012.

Keep believing that my friend

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/03/18/democrats_only_a_few_votes_away.html

Democrats Only a Few Votes Away
It's hard to put too much faith in the various health care whip counts, but First Read reports White House and House Democratic leaders "are fewer than five votes away from 216."

Jonathan Chait: "I have always thought that the key is to get within four or five votes. Once you're there, you're very likely to win. Why? Because then the White House and Democratic leaders can concentrate all their attention on a few holdouts. And they can make an irresistible argument: If you don't vote for this bill, you will be responsible for the political and moral disaster that ensues. I just don't think anybody is willing to be the person who kills health care reform. They may hold back, they may want to see if the bill is going to die anyway, and they may want somebody else to go first. But when the finish line is in sight, they won't say no.".

UPDATE:Now down to only needing 3 votes. Mark Schauer just commiteed to a yes vote

Iggy...cut out that death panel shit

Sarah Palin said on her facebook page they are in there, so they have to be real. How dare you question her integrity by even suggesting they possibly don't exist in the Obamacare proposal?

gibby08 wrote:

tk421 wrote:

IggyPride00 wrote: Obamacare will be the official transition into a single payer system. An interview surfaced recently with him stating the need for a transition program of sorts because it couldn't just happen over night because of the complexity of changing the system.

Fundamental transformation of America begins now.

When will the death panel sign up sheets be administered?

Obama won't be around for that. No way he gets re-elected in 2012.

Keep believing that my friend

Just like you keep believing this bill will magically lower the deficit. I'm sure the deficit fairy will visit us, let's all hold our breathe.

Nice dose of sarcasm there Iggy

tk...give me a list of GOP candidates you think can beat him...and I can give you a vible reason why they can't or won't

gibby08 wrote: I'm not talking about that..

I'm talking about how when the CBO agrees with you people...you love them

When they don't...they suck and are unreliable

It's a preliminary number anyway. As usual, you people jumped the gun and are running with an unconfirmed number.

Oh, and stop saying "you people." It's only cool when I do it.

gibby08 wrote: Nice dose of sarcasm there Iggy

tk...give me a list of GOP candidates you think can beat him...and I can give you a vible reason why they can't or won't

And I'd care about your opinion on the matter, why?

If you think he's going to lose...atleast tell me who you think can beat if...if you can come up with anyone

gibby08 wrote: If you think he's going to lose...atleast tell me who you think can beat if...if you can come up with anyone

Unless the economy improves significantly and unemployment is lower than when he took office, then your question is completely moot. He'll lose to a GOP candidate named "Not Obama." Kinda like how he got elected in the first place.

Isn't it ironic? Dont'cha think?

Palin
Romney
Huckabee
Gingrich
Jindal
Barbour
Brown
Pawlenty
Paul


Those are the GOP frontrunners,and they ALL have atleast one reason why they can't and won't win

fish82 wrote:

gibby08 wrote: If you think he's going to lose...atleast tell me who you think can beat if...if you can come up with anyone

Unless the economy improves significantly and unemployment is lower than when he took office, then your question is completely moot. He'll lose to a GOP candidate named "Not Obama." Kinda like how he got elected in the first place.

Isn't it ironic? Dont'cha think?

I'll think of supporting a Republican candidate...but i will fight tooth and nail to keep Palin out of the White House.

Though, i did see a bumper sticker the other day that said "2012? You Betcha'" with a picture of Palin on it.

At this point, i don't know why even Republicans would support someone like her or the rest of the Republicans in Congress or most anywhere else.

If you want things to really change, gonna have to bring in someone else from the Ron Paul group.

Palin and most other Republican candidates we keep hearing about would just be more of the same, they would just be advocating for other things that the US can't afford.

gibby08 wrote: If you think he's going to lose...atleast tell me who you think can beat if...if you can come up with anyone

Here's a real easy one...

Barrack Obama - doing a real good job of defeating himself

cbus4life wrote:

fish82 wrote:

gibby08 wrote: If you think he's going to lose...atleast tell me who you think can beat if...if you can come up with anyone

Unless the economy improves significantly and unemployment is lower than when he took office, then your question is completely moot. He'll lose to a GOP candidate named "Not Obama." Kinda like how he got elected in the first place.

Isn't it ironic? Dont'cha think?

I'll think of supporting a Republican candidate...but i will fight tooth and nail to keep Palin out of the White House.

Though, i did see a bumper sticker the other day that said "2012? You Betcha'" with a picture of Palin on it.

At this point, i don't know why even Republicans would support someone like her or the rest of the Republicans in Congress or most anywhere else.

If you want things to really change, gonna have to bring in someone else from the Ron Paul group.

Palin and most other Republican candidates we keep hearing about would just be more of the same, they would just be advocating for other things that the US can't afford.

I wasn't advocating a particular candidate, unless quoting an Alanis Morissette song indicates some Freudian wish for her to be elected.

cbus4life wrote: I understand the point of comparing our current situation to communist situations from the past, but i think it is an insult to all those who suffered and died under communist rule to so directly compare situations.

Yes, the government is getting bigger under Obama's watch, but isn't even comparable to the plight of citizens under communist rule, by and large.

I know that it is used to draw attention to the idea that Obama is leading the United States towards becoming a democratic socialist state, but i can't but feel that it is incredibly distasteful to bring up Soviet-era communist comparisons, as we've still got it 100x better than those people did. And, we'll never get to that point, either.

^^I'll agree with most of that- however, the warnings and protests from freedom-loving Americans are so we don't throw away our "100x better" so that the government can take care of us.

As for socialism- it's not too far off from communism, just without the gun pointed at your head.

gibby08 wrote: I'm not talking about that..

I'm talking about how when the CBO agrees with you people...you love them

When they don't...they suck and are unreliable

We're still waiting for the quotes or specific examples of people loving or agreeing with something the CBO projected . . .

You totally dodged every example listed earlier of how terrible past CBO predictions have been, especially in regards to entitlement programs.

gibby08 wrote: Keep believing that my friend

Keep drinking the Kool Aid.

fish82 wrote:

cbus4life wrote:

fish82 wrote:

gibby08 wrote: If you think he's going to lose...atleast tell me who you think can beat if...if you can come up with anyone

Unless the economy improves significantly and unemployment is lower than when he took office, then your question is completely moot. He'll lose to a GOP candidate named "Not Obama." Kinda like how he got elected in the first place.

Isn't it ironic? Dont'cha think?

I'll think of supporting a Republican candidate...but i will fight tooth and nail to keep Palin out of the White House.

Though, i did see a bumper sticker the other day that said "2012? You Betcha'" with a picture of Palin on it.

At this point, i don't know why even Republicans would support someone like her or the rest of the Republicans in Congress or most anywhere else.

If you want things to really change, gonna have to bring in someone else from the Ron Paul group.

Palin and most other Republican candidates we keep hearing about would just be more of the same, they would just be advocating for other things that the US can't afford.

I wasn't advocating a particular candidate, unless quoting an Alanis Morissette song indicates some Freudian wish for her to be elected.

Haha.

jhay78 wrote:

cbus4life wrote: I understand the point of comparing our current situation to communist situations from the past, but i think it is an insult to all those who suffered and died under communist rule to so directly compare situations.

Yes, the government is getting bigger under Obama's watch, but isn't even comparable to the plight of citizens under communist rule, by and large.

I know that it is used to draw attention to the idea that Obama is leading the United States towards becoming a democratic socialist state, but i can't but feel that it is incredibly distasteful to bring up Soviet-era communist comparisons, as we've still got it 100x better than those people did. And, we'll never get to that point, either.

^^I'll agree with most of that- however, the warnings and protests from freedom-loving Americans are so we don't throw away our "100x better" so that the government can take care of us.

As for socialism- it's not too far off from communism, just without the gun pointed at your head.

Fair enough, and agree as well.

Just can't help but feel uncomfortable seeing these direct comparisons of the "Tea Party" folks to those who fought for freedom in communist countries in the like.

We aren't a communist state, nor a socialist state.

And, the lives of those folks aren't in danger.

Just find it slightly distasteful.

But, can't argue with the protesters, really.

jhay78 wrote:

cbus4life wrote: I understand the point of comparing our current situation to communist situations from the past, but i think it is an insult to all those who suffered and died under communist rule to so directly compare situations.

Yes, the government is getting bigger under Obama's watch, but isn't even comparable to the plight of citizens under communist rule, by and large.

I know that it is used to draw attention to the idea that Obama is leading the United States towards becoming a democratic socialist state, but i can't but feel that it is incredibly distasteful to bring up Soviet-era communist comparisons, as we've still got it 100x better than those people did. And, we'll never get to that point, either.

^^I'll agree with most of that- however, the warnings and protests from freedom-loving Americans are so we don't throw away our "100x better" so that the government can take care of us.

As for socialism- it's not too far off from communism, just without the gun pointed at your head.

I hate people pulling the "socialism is communism's cousin" card. You know why? Because the if you want to get technical conservatism is the cousin of fascism.

It's stupid and an insult to the people who lived and died under those situations to compare them. Socialism and to a much greater extent the social democracy that we're trending towards are not some evil group trying to take over the world.

Just like conservatives likely won't start a blitzkrieg anywhere. Unless that place is Iraq, because then they totally did.

But seriously, stop with the communist bullshit unless it's actually communism. And not everything the government looks at is communist.

domestic terrorism --

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/87697-republicans-assail-irs-provision-in-health-care-bill-

We have elected the enemy.

There is all kinds of stuff like that in the bill. The Democrats will regret passing this. In November and in 2012.

QuakerOats wrote:

We have elected the enemy.

This has been evident for awhile. It did not begin with Obama.

QuakerOats wrote: domestic terrorism --

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/87697-republicans-assail-irs-provision-in-health-care-bill-

We have elected the enemy.

Domestic terrorism? My God, you have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm not a fan of that provision myself, as the IRS already has enough stuff to deal with. But ,domestic terrorism? Please, you are just fear mongering